One Response to
John Lentini says:
September 15, 2015 at 8:49 am
Dr. Shermer attended a meeting that was intended to focus on problem areas in forensic science. So it is no surprise that he can tell us about the flaws that we discussed at the meeting. I think, however, that he over-generalizes the problem in this SA article. Not all of forensic science exhibits the same problems as bite marks and fire investigation, and that point was made clear at the meeting. Perhaps he was out of the room at that point. Dr. Victor Weedn, President of the AAFS, has sent a reply to SA. It remains to be seen if SA will publish it.
A FLAMIMG MAGICIAN DETECTING THE REAL CRIMINAL (NOTE THE DISPARATE PARTICIPANTS OF THE LINEUP). From the Scientific American Aug 18 2015
The bloom is certainly off the flower, when the SA starts publicizing the mythologies contained in the corners of forensic expertise.
Can We Trust Crime Forensics?
How trustworthy are DNA and other crime scene tests?
The criminal justice system has a problem, and its name is forensics. This was the message I heard at the Forensic Science Research Evaluation Workshop held May 26–27 at the AAAS headquarters in Washington, D.C. I spoke about pseudoscience but then listened in dismay at how the many fields in the forensic sciences that I assumed were reliable (DNA, fingerprints, and so on) in fact employ unreliable or untested techniques and show inconsistencies between evaluators of evidence.
The conference was organized in response to a 2009 publication by the National Research Council entitled Strengthening…
View original post 420 more words